Slava: Were you were looking for "forment", the word I spelled the word incorrectly, actually meaning "foment". I did finally find "forment", although It wasn't the word I intended to write. It is not an English word but it is a word in French and a Latin.

As for the interesting word "fornenst" that you discovered, I was totally unaware of it. After intense Goggling, I think the consensus is that it is Irish slang that been used in British literature. Not knowing what comprises "Midland U.S.", I have no comment on that. There is a Midland, Texas, out near Odessa.

Philip Hudson wrote:Slava: Were you were looking for "forment", the word I spelled the word incorrectly, actually meaning "foment". I did finally find "forment", although It wasn't the word I intended to write. It is not an English word but it is a word in French and a Latin.

As for the interesting word "fornenst" that you discovered, I was totally unaware of it. After intense Goggling, I think the consensus is that it is Irish slang that been used in British literature. Not knowing what comprises "Midland U.S.", I have no comment on that. There is a Midland, Texas, out near Odessa.

Your guess is correct, I was looking for forment. I had a feeling it wasn't quite right, but doubted myself.

As far as I can tell, though it's understandable, your usage of foment earlier is also not proper. Foment requires a direct object, so things can't foment, they have to be fomented.

Gee, and I always thought Odessa was in the Ukraine.

Life is like playing chess with chessmen who each have thoughts and feelings and motives of their own.

Believing, as I do, that English has no firm definable grammar, I think foment could be transitive or intransitive. Ferment can and they are similar words. I have a memory like a sieve, but I thought I used foment in a transitive sense. I leave finding my bad use of foment in a previous post as an exercise for the students.

Slave, "they" is the subject of the sentence in the nominative case. Whether its referent might be used as an object is irrelavant. The sentence also appears to be in passive voice. "Have to be" is an interesting phrase that might be worth analyzing.

Philip, what do you mean English has no firmly defined grammar? As I write this teachers all over the country are defining grammar and preparing to wear out red pencils on tests and essays that do not conform! ;-)

Perry Lassiter wrote:..."they" is the subject of the sentence in the nominative case. Whether its referent might be used as an object is irrelavant[sic]. The sentence also appears to be in passive voice. "Have to be" is an interesting phrase that might be worth analyzing.

The "they" in my post is a pronoun for "things." Perhaps this version would be better:

Foment requires a direct object. Thus, things in and of themselves cannot foment, they can only be fomented.

Life is like playing chess with chessmen who each have thoughts and feelings and motives of their own.

I have investigated “foment” as far as I am going to. Slava is right. The rule is: "Foment" is a transitive verb. Nevertheless, I may use it as an intransitive verb. In addition to, "People foment rebellion around water coolers." I might say, if I am of a mind, "Rebellion foments around water coolers." After all, English has lousy grammar rules.

Funny your word reminded me of "defenestrate", perhaps it is the "defenestrate skit" from Monty Python's show where there are so many dummies defenestrated and bouncing of the sidewalk. Your word walk near or next to... on a sidewalk is the thought that is the germ of the thought. In Cambridge I have seen many a bunch of over privileged sophomoric children fornenst four abreast or in gaggles of a dozen or more while I'm trying to catch a public conveyance, but I'm not bitter, just jealous of the blissful ignorance of civil awareness or understanding.